Luther! Read Read!

[reen12]

quote: sscandmocc
Nothing makes a thread more interesting than the same verses reposted 25 times for the same premise. Gifted communicators some of you ain’t

And…?

reen12

 

[But_for_Grace]

so as not to repeat myself, see my previous post to answer where Christ says that he has come to fulfill the law. (Mt 5:16-19)

If you wish a fuller answer, indicate so and I will try to give you one, but as for now, I must say goodnight and get ready for work

 

[verismo]

Contarini:

…

Luther did not think that sin could separate a believing person fro God. You can find quotes from him all day long that say that. But he also believed that a believing person would not wilfully commit serious sin. …

Edwin

Hello Edwin,
So, in other words, if someone thought to be a Christian were to be seen committing a “mortal sin”, that would ipso facto prove that person to be non-Christian, because a “true” Christian would never do that?

Thanks in advance for the clarification,
Jon

 

[reen12]

Dear But for Grace,

quote: But for Grace

so as not to repeat myself, see my previous post to answer where Christ says that he has come to fulfill the law. (Mt 5:16-19)

If you wish a fuller answer, indicate so and I will try to give you one, but as for now, I must say goodnight and get ready for work

Thanks, But for Grace!

Hope you have a restful night, and a good day tomorrow,

Best,

reen12

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Contarini and everyone else. I will get to your stuff ASAP, I have been busy and couldnt get here.

 

[Uranage]

Can’t there be a 3rd option?

 

[Contarini]

verismo:

Hello Edwin,
So, in other words, if someone thought to be a Christian were to be seen committing a “mortal sin”, that would ipso facto prove that person to be non-Christian, because a “true” Christian would never do that?

Well, in the first place I suspect that Luther would agree with Catholics that we shouldn’t go around judging people’s hearts rashly. Luther was not that interested in forming a pure church of true Christians. Like the Catholic Church, he recognized that the Church will contain sheep and goats, weeds and tares, pick your metaphor. So I don’t think he would worry too much about your question the way you have phrased it.

Furthermore, Luther (and this is true of mainstream Protestantism generally) tended to focus on the long-term rather than the individual act, on “sin” rather than “sins.” As far as I can tell, for instance, he didn’t think that David lost his faith (and hence his “salvation”) when he sinned with Bathsheba. But Luther can say that because when confronted with his sin David repented. Had David executed Nathan and defied God’s judgment, that would have indicated that he had ceased to be a believer. As far as I can tell, the Reformers saw the sins of believers as arising from the weakness of the flesh. When such sins were openly known, they should be disciplined by either the state or the Church (different Reformers had very different views on how this should happen), in order to preserve society and lead the sinner to repentance. But they shied away from trying to define exactly when a sin became “mortal” in the sense of separating someone from God.

Bear in mind that Luther’s main concern was with scrupulous consciences. He didn’t want to give weak believers a reason to torment themselves over whether a given act was a mortal sin or not, although on occasion he could cite approvingly traditional definitions involving the full consent of the will. It all depended on whether he thought his audience was more prone to scruples or to presumption. But on the whole he was less worried about the latter. I think he figured that if people were going to take the Gospel as an excuse to sin, then they were probably reprobates anyway and too far gone to worry about. He did try to clarify his language, but he wasn’t going to compromise his basic message in order to avoid giving an excuse to those who probably would reject the Gospel anyway.
So no, I don’t think Luther would say, “A true Christian would never do that.” But I think he would say, “If a true Christian does that, he/she will be tormented by their conscience and will repent of what they have done.” And as I showed in an earlier post, he did explicitly say in the Galatians commentary that if someone gave themselves over to sin they would lose their faith (and hence no longer be a true Christian). But obviously the line between a true Christian having fallen into a horrible sin and a false Christian giving himself over joyfully to sin may not always be obvious. And Luther was OK with that.

The remedy, of course, is the same either way. Repent of your sins from the bottom of your heart (and confess them to a priest/pastor), place your whole trust in Christ’s mercy, hear the Word, and receive the Sacraments. Strive against the desires of the flesh, and love your neighbor out of gratitude for Christ’s unmerited love for you.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Catholic Dude:

Contarini and everyone else. I will get to your stuff ASAP, I have been busy and couldnt get here.

That’s perfectly fine. I spent way too long on those posts and am quite happy not to continue the discussion for a while! In fact I may not answer immediately if I’m busy with stuff myself.

Edwin

 

[reen12]

quote: Contarini

Bear in mind that Luther’s main concern was with scrupulous consciences. He didn’t want to give weak believers a reason to torment themselves over whether a given act was a mortal sin or not, although on occasion he could cite approvingly traditional definitions involving the full consent of the will. It all depended on whether he thought his audience was more prone to scruples or to presumption

.
You are so right, re scrupulosity.

Only one affected by such torment could realize what
Luther’s Tower Experience was all about.

Luther literally saved my sanity, in terms of scrupulosity.
It is held by some, that scrupulosity may be a form
of obsessive-compulsive disorder.

There are even websites, devoted to Christians who
suffer from scrupulosity.

quote: Uranage

Can’t there be a 3rd option?

Yes, trust Christ. When you forget to parse who’s got
faith and who doesn’t, who’s really “accepted Christ”
and who hasn’t, then the real praying can begin, IMHO.

Thought I’d weigh in on this one.

Best,

reen12

 

[Assurance]

Hello all,

I’ve just finished reading up on all of these posts and I must say, as a Lutheran, that Contarini has done a wonderful job speaking up on brother Martin’s defense.

Contarini - I think your hard work in really trying to help people understand the views of someone you don’t necessarily fully agree with is a testimony to all of us!

Thanks for showing me what that can look like.

In Christ,
isfatherwrong?

 

[verismo]

Contarini:

Well, in the first place…

Edwin

Thanks for all that Edwin, and I would actually be very interested in reading Luther’s writing on the full consent of the will. But, What I mean by my question, wording dissatisfaction aside, is:

Did Luther believe that a Christian, if he were truly a Christian, would not commit a serious sin willfully?

Therefore, one who does so, is either not really committing serious sin, he just appears to be, or is not really a Christian, cause they wouldn’t do that.

Not to judge other people. Just a comment on the life/state of a Christian: that they “can’t” commit serious sins?

This is not a trap for an argument; I just want to know.

 

[reen12]

Good question, verismo, IMHO. I look forward to
Contarini’s reply.

quote: verismo

Thanks for all that Edwin, and I would actually be very interested in reading Luther’s writing on the full consent of the will. But, What I mean by my question, wording dissatisfaction aside, is:

Did Luther believe that a Christian, if he were truly a Christian, would not commit a serious sin willfully?

Therefore, one who does so, is either not really committing serious sin, he just appears to be, or is not really a Christian, cause they wouldn’t do that.

Not to judge other people. Just a comment on the life/state of a Christian: that they “can’t” commit serious sins?

This is not a trap for an argument; I just want to know.

Best,

reen12

 

[Assurance]

I know the question is for Edwin, but can I jump in here?

veresimo asked:

Did Luther believe that a Christian, if he were truly a Christian, would not commit a serious sin willfully?

In my hasty reading, maybe I missed a definition previously, but how do you define “serious sin”? Is this “mortal sin”? If so, could you explain to me why mortal sin is mortal, according to Catholics? (in what sense is it mortal?). I ask because Lutherans also talk about venial sins and mortal sins in thier confessions, though I think they would say all sin is serious!

One Lutheran said something like: “Small sins become big sins when they are considered small.” (I can try to explain that better if you like).

 

[Contarini]

verismo:

Thanks for all that Edwin, and I would actually be very interested in reading Luther’s writing on the full consent of the will. But, What I mean by my question, wording dissatisfaction aside, is:

Did Luther believe that a Christian, if he were truly a Christian, would not commit a serious sin willfully?

Therefore, one who does so, is either not really committing serious sin, he just appears to be, or is not really a Christian, cause they wouldn’t do that.

He went beyond that, as I pointed out in my posts to Catholic Dude. He explicitly said that if you “give yourself over to sin” you lose faith. So you might be a true Christian but cease to be one because you choose to turn away from Christ and abandon yourself to your sinful desires. Your question keeps presupposing eternal security, which Luther did not believe.

But given Luther’s apparent willingness to say that David remained a true believer throughout his sinful behavior (though I’d like to think I’m reading him wrong there), I don’t think I can give a simple answer to your question. It depends how wilful is wilful, and it depends which text of Luther’s you are looking at. Bear in mind that even Catholics vary quite a bit on exactly what it means to give full consent of the will to a sin. If I read Luther rightly, he would go with more modern Catholics who have a very narrow conception of what it means to consent. He uses the term “give yourself over.”

Sorry to be elusive, but I think you’re asking the kind of question Luther was trying to avoid, and to interpret him fairly I have to avoid it too! I think he was trying to avoid the kind of map Catholics (and Arminian Protestants of the tradition I was raised in) tend to construct in their heads: here I entered a state of grace, here I left it, here I entered it–oops! there I had a near go but I think it was just a venial sin, etc. He wanted to cut through all that and focus people on whether they were trusting in Christ.

Here’s the best I can do: Luther believed that if a true Christian committed a serious sin; they would either:

1. Lose their faith in Christ and be damned
2. Lose their faith in Christ, but later repent and return to faith in Christ and the pursuit of a holy life; or
3. Be deeply troubled by their sin, and repent relatively quickly, because they remained believers who had sinned through weakness

Whether 3 is equivalent to Catholics committing a mortal sin and later repenting, or Catholics commiting a sin with grave matter but insufficient consent, is something I simply don’t have the wherewithal to answer (and it may be impossible to answer, since Catholics clearly differ on what is sufficient consent for mortal sin). And for both Lutherans and Catholics, practically speaking the result is the same in either case: repent as quickly as possible and get your posterior to the confessional!

I know I’m probably just repeating my former, unsatisfactory answer. But I don’t know any other way to answer.

Edwin

 

[Assurance]

Real short - Edwin is awesome.

Interesting tidbit: in the amazing “the Quest of Holiness” written by Lutheran theologican Adolf Koberle in the 1930’s he says in chapter 6 that though all sins equally separate the Christian from a Holy God (from God’s perspective - regarding God’s relationship with the believer, we all stand guilty before Him and His eyes are too pure to look upon us - keep in mind that through Christ though, love [the blood!] covers over a multitude of sins!), some sins (he doesn’t talk specifically about wilfulness or consent much I think), particularly those of deed (word and thought are serious too) have a greater “binding effect” on the believer in that they are more effective in driving out faith, or trust. Of course, when faith is driven out, the person ceases to be a believer though re-conversion is possible. So looking at it this way, one can see here how serious sins affect the man-God relationship from the believer’s perspective.

Yes, Lutherans are definitely not like the Reformed. The early Luther may have sounded a little like Calvin in the Bondage of the Will, but one must take into consideration his later work.

In any case, remember that Lutherans only subscribe to the Book of Concord, not Luther.

 

[Steven_Merten]

Hello All,

If I understand Edwin right, the reason Luther teaches anti Christ’s teachings and considers himself an “opponant” to Christ’s teachings, is because Luther did not want Christians to be discouraged by Jesus harsh statements.

Should Luther take it upon himself to counter Jesus teachings even if he does think that Jesus teachings discourage Christians?

At another thread, 75% of the response is voting that people will be judged according to their conduct. Luther hates Jesus teachings on this. Please come and respond. Will Jesus judge people into heaven (through Him) or Hell based on conduct?

Luther

The doctrine of our opponents is similar to that of the false apostles in Paul’s day.Our opponents teach, "If you want to live unto God, you must live after the Law, for it is written, Do this and thou shalt live." NAB MAT 19:16

“Teacher, what good must I do to possess everlasting life?” He answered, “Why do you question me about what is good? There is One who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” NAB LUK 10:25

"Teacher, what must I do to inherit everlasting life?" Jesus answered him:****"What is written in the law? How do you read it?" He replied:

**"You shall love the Lord your God **
**with all your heart, **
**with all your soul, **
**with all your strength, **
**and with all your mind; **
and your neighbor as yourself."
Jesus said, “You have answered correctly. Do this and you shall live.”
Luther

No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day.

NAB GEN 3:1 Now the serpent was the most cunning of all the animals that the LORD God had made. The serpent asked the woman, "Did God really tell you not to eat from any of the trees in the garden?" The woman answered the serpent: “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden; it is only about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden that God said, 'You shall not eat it or even touch it, lest you die.’” But the serpent said to the woman: “You certainly will not die!..”

NAB REV 2:22

“I mean to cast her down on a bed of pain; her companions in sin I will plunge into intense suffering unless they repent of their sins with her, and her children I will put to death. Thus shall all the churches come to know that I am the searcher of hearts and minds, and that **I will give each of you what your conduct deserves.”**NAB JOH 5:27

"The Father has given over to him power to pass judgment because he is Son of Man; … …Those who have done right shall rise to live; the evildoers shall rise to be damned."

NAB ROM 2:6 (St. Paul is speaking)

. . . when he will repay every man for what he has done: eternal life to those who strive for glory, honor, and immortality by patiently doing right; wrath and fury to those who selfishly disobey the truth and obey wickedness.

NAB REV 22:12

"Remember, I am coming soon! I bring with me the reward that will be given to each man as his conduct deserves.

 

[Assurance]

Steve Merten,

Hello. I just finished reading your last array of Scripture passages. Well - here’s the deal: Luther would say that he believes every one of those Scriptural passages. In regards to the question: “Will Jesus judge people into heaven (through Him) or Hell based on conduct?”, the answer is yes and no.

Let me explain!

Before the eyes of men, the final judgement will occur according to the external conduct of believers. Before the eyes of the Father, the final judgment will occur by virture of the perfect life and innocent death of Jesus Christ on behalf of the one who believes in Jesus.

In other words, salvation is fully the believer’s when he is baptized into Christ. Christ is his righteousness, sanctification, wisdom, justification (I Cor 1:30). And yet, just as a man cannot decide to be born but can kill himself, the believer can do this with His spiritual life.

In short, its like this: Having already been made disciples, the Christian is to become a disciple. Having been made a child of God, the Christian is to become one. Having been made a friend, the Christian is to become a friend. Having been made pure, the Christian is to become pure. Having been given a light that shines, we are to let it shine. Having been made a young apple fruit, the Christian is to become a mature apple fruit. In His call – in His declarative Word – Christ gives all things. God possesses all things and we possess nothing. If we are predestined, called, justified, sanctified and glorified, such is to the glory of God. If we are reprobate, unjust, wicked, ungodly and damned, the blame lies only on us. Only God gives life and makes alive. All things have their beginning in Christ and find their end in Him. In Him alone we are secure and apart from Him we have no security. Do nothing, but only believe.

As to Luther denying Jesus’ comments, Edwin has addressed that quite well I think. Keep in mind that Jesus and Paul should not be set against one another, and Paul said: “Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” (Rom 3:20). (Actually, I would argue that Lutherans take Jesus’ hard words of Law far more seriously than Catholics, and would be interested in talking about this more).

And yet, fully freed by Christ, the Christian joyfully fulfills the law (Rom 8:4!). They have no other life but that life which Christ perfectly lived, fulfilling the Law in love. In this sense, in each moment of obedience, faith is preserved in the sanctified life by Christ. It is only within the confines of this life in, with, and through Christ that they are free from the accusations of the law, from the life and faith-destroying power of sin, from death, and the devil. For in our baptism we have been given in totality the very life of Christ, which is the life of the One who does the will of the Father, hearing the Word and doing it, thereby weathering the dangers of life’s eternal storms (Matthew 7). This is significant, because the very life of Christ is our life as well! (Gal. 2:20) Truly, all things find their beginning and end in Him. Insofar as a Christian is a new creature in Christ, abiding in Him and walking according to the Spirit can only mean true freedom (James 2), safety (Matthew 7), and a lack of burden (Matthew 11, I John 4).

And yes, Steve – Luther did write that about sin not separating us from God. Though exaggerating to his scrupulous friend Melanchton to make a point as has been pointed out here, I don’t think he should have written that! Please take into account what Edwin has said about Luther’s formal theological work (like his Galatians commentary), where he shows how sin drives out faith.

 

[Assurance]

Steve Merten,

You may still have some questions about the distinction I made above (which Lutherans make as well) regarding “justification before MEN” and “justification before GOD” (see Romans 4 when Paul says Abraham had something to boast about – BUT NOT BEFORE GOD!). I hope the following paragraph helps:

Through the bloody cross of Christ, the Christian has already been called – has been declared righteous in advance of God’s final judgment (thereby creating faith) – where not their faith, but their visible works will be put forth as evidence before the world that they were indeed God’s beloved children. Even in the end, our works are there not because God needs them (in this case to “merit” His approval at the judgment seat – to earn His final approval), but because the neighbor does. It is here that the unbelieving world – the goats – will finally be presented with the only evidence that counts – the truth of those good works that Christians performed out of love for Christ. For true children love their eldest brother, as well as their brothers, sisters, and Heavenly Father. Indeed, it is impossible to conceive of salvation apart from obedience to the law, and truly, this is all well and good – for God desires these two distinct things to be connected before the world on the last day! Jesus said “if you love me you will obey me”, and to the extent that Christians obeyed God, they did so not to be saved, but because they were saved!

 

[Assurance]

I also offer this from the Apology to the Augsburg Confession in the Book of Concord, the book of what Lutherans believe, teach, and confess:

(On II Peter 1:10): Peter is talking about the works that follow the forgiveness of sins and teaches why they should be done, namely, in order to confirm their calling, that is, so that they do not fall from their calling by sinning again. Do good works to persevere in your calling and to keep from losing the gifts of your calling, which were given beforehand, not on account of the works that follow, and which are now retained by faith. Faith does not remain in those who lose the Holy Spirit and reject repentance. As we said above, faith exists in repentance. (Apology XX:13)

The founder of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod said “the Christian is one who fears to commit a single sin”. This is true. Now, when you have a Church hierarchy that starts piling unto troubled Christian consciences more and more human traditions on top of the 10 commandments (which Luther said were more than enough to keep us busy!) and the two greatest, one can see how some souls like Luther’s will become totally convinced they are damned and hate God.

By the way Steve - and I ask this in all seriousness - are a monk? Someone who has sold everything they own to follow Jesus?

 

[verismo]

Contarini:

…I know I’m probably just repeating my former, unsatisfactory answer. But I don’t know any other way to answer.

Edwin

JMJ

Not at all Edwin, it was a great answer, and perfectly clear to me now. Thank you so much.

The eternal security question was what I was getting at.

Thanks you again, I hope we talk again soon, and thank you for being so charitable!